The 15th Symposium on Human Factors in Maintenance and Inspection 27-29 March 2001

W. B. Johnson London, UK

HUMAN FACTORS PROGRAMS:

FACT OR FANTASY?
William B. Johnson, Ph.D.
Chief Technology Officer
Galaxy Scientific Corporation
Atlanta, Georgia
770.491.1100
drbillj@drbillj.com

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Airlines, repair stations, manufactures, and regulators have paid attention to human factors in
aviation maintenance for a long time. However, the formal programs, named “human factors”
or “maintenance resource management”, emerged during the mid-nineties. Now, in 2001,
international regulations are formalizing the requirement for human factors knowledge by the
licensed engineer/maintenance technician. Regulators are now encouraging operators to
establish human factors programs for maintenance. Many maintenance organizations have
programs in place and nearly all maintenance organizations can “talk a good game” about what
they are doing in maintenance human factors. This paper and questionnaire attempts to separate
talk from action, or “fact” from “fantasy”, regarding the human factors programs.

WHAT IS A HUMAN FACTORS PROGRAM

This is the 15th Annual Symposium for Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance. Therefore,
this is hardly the venue to offer a Primer on Maintenance Human Factors. Instead, the meeting
should be an opportunity to take stock of your current human factors initiatives and find ways
not only to sustain but also to improve your existing programs. The meeting should also help
you project into the future as you evolve your human factors programs for the first decade of the
millennium.
Speaking realistically, this meeting can also help maintenance managers ask themselves the
introspective question: “Do we really have a Maintenance Human Factors program, or is it a
fantasy?”
A human factors program, for a maintenance organization, is a means to identify, understand,
and mitigate the characteristics of the human to system interaction that may lead to sub optimal
performance. In some cases the program may fix the maintenance system by improving the
physical workplace, the tools, the procedures, or the social environment that contribute to
maintenance error. The other alternative is to make a change to the human condition by
changing the requirements and experience of the worker or by training the worker to
compensate for other system deficiencies. Ideally, a human factors program “tunes” the system
to capitalize on the complementary respective strengths and limitations of the human and of the
machine. An excellent human factors program strives for the continuous improvement and
optimization of the human-machine combination. Succinctly, human factors programs reduce
the likelihood of error, contribute to worker and product safety, and ensure continuing efficient
and effective maintenance work.
Fact or Fantasy?

The definition in the paragraph above is very general, difficult to measure, and hard to argue
whether an organization has such a program in place. With or without a human factors
program, most maintenance organizations would say “Yes, that is what we try to do.” There
are many high value human factor interventions (Johnson, 1999). It is merely a matter of
choosing the ones that work best for your requirements, your resources, and the level of
corporate commitment. The next section of this paper offers a few of the critical components
of a human factors program. An organization must take certain action to ensure that their human
factors program is fact and not fantasy. The sections below describe components of a “real”
human factors program and ask a set of questions that are also included as an appendix to this
paper.

Identify Your Opportunities to Improve Performance

An error investigation system helps an organization identify the opportunities for improvement
(Johnson and Watson, 2001). A human factors program must have an error investigation
component. The error investigation program relies on trained investigators, who have a
reasonable portion of their time dedicated to investigations. The error investigation system
must identify human factors that contribute to an error by providing an organized method to
openly report and then thoroughly investigate an incident. Boeing’s Maintenance Error
Decision Aid (MEDA) is the most popular industry examples of an investigation system. The
MEDA system has been described elsewhere (Rankin et al., 1998, Allen and Rankin, 1997).
This report assumes that the reader has knowledge of MEDA.
Another way to identify the opportunities to improve performance is to conduct a formal human
factors audit. The FAA Office of Aviation Medicine has conducted research, published
reports, and provided tools to conduct human factors audits (Maddox, 1998, Drury, 1998.)
There are a number of consulting companies that are available to conduct a human factors audit
within a maintenance organization. An audit reviews issues like the following: development
and support of technical documentation; corporate and local technical communication;
scheduling and workflow; physiological environment conditions; training; error investigation
systems; process and procedures; and more. Companies design each audit for the perceived
and observed requirements of the specific maintenance organization. A thorough audit will
identify weakness and present a plan to address the challenges.
Fact or Fantasy Questions About Identifying Opportunities to Improve Performance
(Answer Yes or No to each of the questions)

#. Question Yes No
1. We use a MEDA-like system.
2. In Year 2000, we conducted over 25 MEDA-like investigations.
3. In Year 2000, we conducted over 100 MEDA-like investigations.
4. Our MEDA-like data (from questions 2 &3 above) are in a database.
5. We could demonstrate this fully operating MEDA-like database
tomorrow.
6. From 1998-2001 we trained over 5 investigators for the MEDA-like
system.
7. Boeing delivered MEDA training at our site.

2
Fact or Fantasy?

8. We have conducted a formal human factors audit in our

maintenance organization.
9. We have a written report on the HF audit (from Question 8 above).
10. We have a formal disciple policy that encourages error reporting.

Understand the Fundamentals

Human factors disciplines are many and varied, a fact demonstrated repeatedly with the
“Disciplines of Human Factors” diagram (Johnson, 1998). Human factors fundamentals
include such disciplines as the following: organizational, educational, cognitive, experimental,
and clinical psychology; physiology, industrial engineering, and industrial safety. It is unlikely
that anyone has formal training and experience in all of these disciplines. And it is not
necessary to have expertise in all of these areas. However, the organization’s maintenance
human factors specialist should, at least, be able to identify and define the human factors
disciplines germane to the organizational requirements.
The industry has demonstrated that the preference is to train an aviation maintenance person in
human factors rather than train a human factors person to understand aviation maintenance.
While the exact time frame can be debated, one might say that it takes at least four years to
begin to understand the aviation maintenance system. And generally, the more experience the
greater the knowledge. The same is true with understanding and proper application of the
fundamentals of human factors. It takes a combination of formal training and experience to
build the relevant expertise. An organization would hardly want an untrained and
inexperienced person to diagnose and repair a constant speed drive. The same concept can
apply to assigning untrained personnel to duties as the internal human factors specialist.
Despite the myth, mere long experience as a human does not necessarily qualify one as a human
factors expert.
There are many ways for aviation maintenance personnel to learn about the fundamentals of
human factors. Over the past decade many industry maintenance experts have taken advantage
of formal graduate programs, short courses, conferences and workshops, and participation in
human factors research projects as a means to enhance their human factors credentials. With
this new knowledge they have provided their companies and the industry with many exemplary
techniques and programs. The workshops of this symposium offer many examples of such
techniques and programs.
Formal education and training is required to grasp some of the fundamentals. There are many
undergraduate and graduate programs offered worldwide. At least one university (Embry-
Riddle Aeronautical University) offers a human factors program through its extended campus.
Such programs cater to working professionals. Thus, one can continue daily work in airline
maintenance while also building knowledge of the human factors fundamentals. Closely
related to the formal university programs are the private short courses and conferences on
human factors. These short courses are usually designed for the experienced aviation
maintenance professional.
The FAA Office of Aviation Medicine, starting in 1988, created a research and development
program that had a goal to bring the human factors education and practices to the industry.
Through its many projects, publications, and website this program has become an important
means of industry education. Through this program the human factors consultants brought their
expertise to the industry (See Watson and Johnson, 2001). At the same time, the industry taught
the consultants a great deal about aviation maintenance. Many graduate students learned about
psychology and engineering at the university while participating in industry-centered research

3
Fact or Fantasy?

projects. The result is many outstanding new graduates that understand not only human factors
but also airline maintenance.
Many maintenance organizations have either hired human factors consultants or actively
participated in the FAA research projects. Interaction with the consultants and/or the
researchers has also helped many airline maintenance personnel gain very credible
understanding of human factors fundamentals.
Other regulatory agencies provide excellent human factors assistance. Transport Canada offers
a maintenance human factors program and has provided international leadership in course
development for a long time. The CAA of the United Kingdom has strongly encouraged their
maintenance organizations to use a formal error investigation process. The CAA provides
guidance and software to assist with investigations.
Fact or Fantasy Questions About Understanding the Fundamentals
#. Question Yes No
11. Our company maintenance human factors specialist has an
academic degree in a human factors-related discipline.
12. Our human factors specialist has taken 1 special human factors
course.
13. Our human factors specialist has taken 2 or more special human
factors courses.
14. Our human factors specialist has helped prepared a curriculum and
currently teaches a maintenance human factors course.
15. Our human factors specialist has attended more than 2 human
factors conferences.
16. Our human factors specialist has attended more than 5 human
factors conferences.
17. Our company has presented papers at the FAA-CAA-Transport
Canada human factors meetings.
18. Fifty percent of our managers have received over 4 hours of human
factors training.
19. Fifty percent of our engineers(Non-US)/mechanics have received at
least 8 hours of human factors training.
20. We are currently offering a HF refresher course to maintenance
personnel.
21. We have delivered Human Factors training in 2001.

22. Human factors is introduced as part of our new employee training

for maintenance personnel.
23. Our Chief Executive Officer actively supports maintenance human
factors with words and actions.

4
Fact or Fantasy?

Fix What is Broken

This paper has discussed means of identifying opportunities to improve the maintenance system
to reduce the probability of human error. Error investigation systems and human factors audits
are two obvious ways. Sometimes personnel return from training, or from a conference like
this one, and implement immediate “Fixes.” The least desirable way to identify a necessary
“Fix” is a job injury, an error, an incident, or even an accident. Whatever the motivation, the
organization must improve the system and move on. If related to the human factors program it
is likely that your organization keeps a list of the fixes and observes the impact. The cost
analysis of such programs is discussed in another section.
When human factors programs are discussed there is often discussion about the commitment
from senior management. Such commitment is important, especially with respect to allocation
of resources for programs. However, when human factors initiatives fail it is seldom the fault
of senior management. In many cases it is the middle management, or the maintenance
personnel, who have not “bought in” to the key principles of maintenance human factors. Such
personnel, by their very nature of their jobs, are driven by schedules and aircraft readiness.
This level of the organization is important because they control such activities as scheduling,
shift turnover, procedure compliance, workplace environmental conditions, and more. This
challenge of sensitizing the middle managers must be “fixed” by creating programs that train
them and reinforce human factors and error prevention. There is unanimous agreement that this
is a critical challenge for maintenance human factors.
Fact or Fantasy Questions About Fixing What is Broken

#. Question Yes No
24. We have a formal listing of our added human factors interventions
since 1999.
25. We assess and report the impact of human factors interventions.
26. We could show these assessment reports tomorrow.
27. We have specific methods to reinforce maintenance human factors
to our middle managers in the maintenance organization.

Take Proactive Steps

Human factors programs can be motivated by the recognition that such activity can reduce
error, promote safety of work, ensure continuing product safety, and contribute to cost
effectiveness. Job injuries, maintenance error, incidents, and accidents also motivate
development and implementation of human factors programs. Of course, taking the proactive
steps to develop and implement human factors programs is the more desirable course of action.
Many of the sections of this report describe various proactive steps toward a “real” human
factors program.
This section is an ideal place to emphasize that there are many, many components to a
maintenance human factors program. Many represent that a training program, called
Maintenance Resource Management or Maintenance Human Factors, is the first and most
important activity. That may be true for some organizations, but in the case of human factors
“One size does not fit all.” Error investigations, audits, suggestion boxes, quality programs,
shift changeover safety discussions, ergonomic design of work stations, selection of new tools,

5
Fact or Fantasy?

redesign of work procedures, and so many more activities are components of a proactive
system to improve human work performance.
It is important to document the activities, challenges, and successes of your company’s human
factors program. Such documentation creates a corporate history and provides critical
guidance as personnel retire or transition to other opportunities. The company’s maintenance
human factors expertise must not reside only in the head of the current maintenance human
factors specialist. Ideally, the activities of the Maintenance Human Factors Specialist should
be documented within written operating procedures. Human factors activities should be part of
the documentation for ISO 9000 or other similar quality programs.
Here are a few questions to assess your proactivity.
Fact or Fantasy Questions About Taking Proactive Steps

#. Question Yes No
28. Our human factors courses change with each offering, to address
new issues identified by workers and supervisors.
29. I can list specific examples of #28 above.
30. We have formal means for workers to provide suggestions to the
human factors specialist.
31. We have a formal method for the human factors specialist to
provide regular briefings to senior maintenance management.
32. We work very closely with our regulator to monitor our human
factors program.
33. We employ a trained human factors specialist who spends over
75% of his/her time as an advocate for human factors in
maintenance.
34. We have formal maintenance human factors campaign ongoing at
this time.
35. We are active participants in ATA or our International Human
Factors Working Group.
36. We have a formal quality program like ISO9000 or High
Performance Workplace.
37. Our quality program explicitly addresses human factors.

38. In the past year, we changed a process or a procedure because of

a human factors issue.
39. In the past year we bought new tooling because of a human factors
issue.
40. We have an explicit line item in the budget for human factors
interventions.

6
Fact or Fantasy?

Measure the Outputs

Cost-Benefit analysis is a popular topic for airlines and maintenance organizations these days.
Johnson, et al., (2000), Taylor (2000), and Stelly (2000) have offered ways to conduct
straightforward calculations for Return on Investment. Essentially, they proposed calculations
for the human factors investments versus the likely return on those investments. The examples
are very straightforward and demonstrate a quick rate of return in most cases.
Some have referred to Maintenance Resource Management or Maintenance Human Factors as
“The flavor of the day.” When there is a documented legacy of the financial success of the
program, it is more likely to remain as a fully integrated component of the maintenance
organization.

Fact or Fantasy Questions About Measuring the Outputs

#. Question Yes No
41. We perform a Cost-Benefit or Return-on-Investment calculation to
justify our human factors interventions.
42. We can show, at this moment, success stories and positive
examples of cost-benefit of our human factors interventions.
43. Our management demands ROI calculations in our proposed
program plans.

Plan for the Future

In this discussion, good plans can also earn positive points. If an organization does not have a
formal human factors program but has one in the near plans, then you shall earn your “Yes”
answers here. In some cases the plans are emerging to respond to new Joint Aviation
Regulations and Canadian Aviation Regulations. No matter the reason, this section assesses
your plans.
There is one caveat to consider as you answer the questions below. Assume that the word
“Plan” means that it is written down in a formal manner and, most likely, has a budget with the
support of critical senior and participating personnel.
Fact or Fantasy Questions About Planning for the Future
(If your program already has this then check yes)
#. Question Yes No
44. We have, or plan to have a maintenance human factors specialist
working 50% time during 2001.
45. We have, or plan to have one maintenance human factors specialist
working, during 2001, for each 2500 personnel in maintenance jobs
(Interpolate for smaller organizations).
46. We have a firm schedule to start/continue large-scale human
factors training in 2001.
47. We shall conduct a maintenance human factors audit during 2001.
48. We shall comply with JAR 66 and CAR 66 and related regulations.
49. We plan to conduct MEDA-like Investigator training in 2001.
50. We shall attend the FAA-Transport Canada-CAA Maintenance
Human Factors meeting in San Francisco in April 2002.

7
Fact or Fantasy?

DO YOU REALLY HAVE A PROGRAM OR PIECES?

Through the years of these Regulator-Industry conferences, since 1988, speakers and attendees
have generally agreed that a maintenance human factors program must have many components.
Single point adjustments do not constitute a human factors program. The questions discussed
above and during the conference presentation should clearly demonstrate that a good human
factors program is multifaceted. There must be commitment and knowledge from the top to the
depths of the maintenance organization, and cooperation from the regulator, to ensure an
ongoing program.
The questions above require a multi-faceted approach to determine that you have a “real”
human factors program. So let’s begin the count:
#. Category Yes No
1. - 10. Opportunities to Improve Performance
11. - Understand the Fundamentals
23.
24. - Fix What is Broken
27.
28. - Taking Proactive Steps
40.
41. - Measure the Output
44.
45. - Plan for the future
50.
Totals Totals must add to 50.

FACT OR FANTASY RATING

The table below offers guidance on the reality of your program. During the review cycle of
this paper there were mixed comments. Some reviewers called to say that the questions were
too tough. Others said that the grading scale below is too easy. Each organization must judge
itself and decide what level of human factors activity is best for them.
This questionnaire and discussion has offered an opportunity for introspection. If you are
proud of your score then congratulations are due to you and to your company. If your score
falls below your fantasy then this activity offers a means for mid-course correction.

8
Fact or Fantasy?

# Of Yes Fact-Fantasy Rating

41 - 50 You, in FACT, have a “real” human factors program.
31 - 40 You are well on your way with respect to a having a “real” program.
21 - 30. You are a prospect for a good consultant to help fulfill your human factors
fantasy.
20 or You may want to take this list to senior management upon return. Avoid
below. your regulator on the journey.

“Is not this something more than Fantasy?”

Hamlet - William Shakespeare

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author gratefully acknowledges Ms. Jean Watson and the Office of Aviation Medicine for
promoting a thorough understanding of the critical components for a “Real” Human Factors
Program. The author acknowledges colleagues who reviewed this paper and tested the
questions of fact and fantasy. They include Art Yonkin - Continental; Jerry Allen - Delta, Jeff
Bongard – B.F. Goodrich, Dr. William Rankin – Boeing Company, Dr. Steve Hall – Embry-
Riddle Uni, and Dr. Colin Drury – Uni. Buffalo.

REFERENCES
1. Allen, J.P., Jr., and Rankin, W.L. (1997). Use of the maintenance error decision aid
(MEDA) to enhance safety and reliability and reduce costs in the commercial aviation
industry. The 10th Annual FAA Conference on Aviation Maintenance and Inspection.
FAA: Washington, DC. 1996. (http://hfskyway.faa.gov).
2. Drury, C.G. (1998). Establishing a human factors and ergonomics program. In M. Maddox
(Ed.), The Human Factors Guide for Aviation Maintenance and Inspection. Washington, DC:
Federal Aviation Administration. (http://hfskyway.faa.gov).
3. Johnson, W.B. and Watson, J. (2001). Installation Error in Airline Maintenance.
Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration Office of Aviation Medicine.
http://hfskyway.faa.gov.

9
Fact or Fantasy?

4. Johnson, W.B. (1999). Selecting high value human factors interventions. Proceedings of
the IQPC Ltd. Conference on Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance. Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, April 27-28, 1999.
5. Johnson, W.B. (1998). Past, present, and future of human factors in aviation. Proceedings
of the 12th Symposium on Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance. Joint meeting of
CAA, FAA, and Transport Canada at Gatwick Airport, UK, 10-12 March 1998.
(http://hfskyway.faa.gov).
6. Johnson, W.B., Sian, I.B., and Watson, J. (2000). Measuring the impact of human factors
interventions. SAE Meeting on Advances in Aviation Safety. Daytona Beach, Florida,
April 11-13, 2000. (http://hfskyway.faa.gov).
7. Maddox, M. (Ed.). (1998). The Human Factors Guide for Aviation Maintenance and Inspection.
Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration. (http://hfskyway.faa.gov).
8. Rankin, W.L., Allen, J.P., Jr., and Sargent, R.A. (1998). Maintenance error decision aid:
progress report. The 11th Annual FAA Conference on Aviation Maintenance and
Inspection. Washington, DC: FAA 1998. (http://hfskyway.faa.gov).
9. Stelly, J. (2000). Return on investment in human factors training. Proceedings of the 14th
Symposium on Human Factors in Aviation Maintenance. Joint meeting of CAA, FAA,
and Transport Canada at Vancouver, BC, 10-12 March 1998. (http://hfskyway.faa.gov).
10. Taylor, J. (2000). A new model for return on investment for MRM programs. SAE Meeting
on Advances in Aviation Safety. Daytona Beach, Florida, April 11-13, 2000.
(http://hfskyway.faa.gov).
11. Watson, J. and Johnson, W.B. (2001). Assessing aviation maintenance work environments
and worker rest. Proceedings of the 15th Symposium on Human Factors in Aviation
Maintenance. Joint meeting of CAA, FAA, and Transport Canada at the Brewery, London,
UK, 27-29 March 2001.

10
Fact or Fantasy?

HUMAN FACTORS PROGRAMS:

FACT OR FANTASY QUESTIONNAIRE

Directions: Check Yes or No. Leave no blanks.

#. Questions on Identifying Opportunities to Improve Yes No
Performance
1. We use a MEDA-like system.
2. In Year 2000, we conducted over 25 MEDA-like investigations.
3. In Year 2000, we conducted over 100 MEDA-like investigations.
4. Our MEDA-like data (from questions 2 &3 above) are in a database.

5. We could demonstrate this fully operating MEDA-like database

tomorrow.
6. From 1998-2001 we trained over 5 investigators for the MEDA-like
system.
7. Boeing delivered MEDA training at our site.

8. We have conducted a formal human factors audit in our

maintenance organization.
9. We have a written report on the HF audit (from Question 8 above).

10. We have a formal disciple policy that encourages error reporting.

#. Questions on Understanding the Fundamentals Yes No

11. Our company maintenance human factors specialist has an
academic degree in a human factors-related discipline.
12. Our human factors specialist has taken 1 special human factors
course.
13. Our human factors specialist has taken 2 or more special human
factors courses.
14. Our human factors specialist has helped prepared a curriculum and
currently teaches a maintenance human factors course.
15. Our human factors specialist has attended more than 2 human
factors conferences.
16. Our human factors specialist has attended more than 5 human
factors conferences.

11
Fact or Fantasy?

17. Our company has presented papers at the FAA-CAA-Transport

Canada human factors meetings.
18. Fifty percent of our managers have received over 4 hours of human
factors training.
19. Fifty percent of our engineers/mechanics have received at least 8
hours of human factors training.
20. We are currently offering a HF refresher course to maintenance
personnel.
21. We have delivered Human Factors training in 2001.

22. Human factors is introduced as part of our new employee training

for maintenance personnel.
23. Our Chief Executive Officer actively supports maintenance human
factors in his words and actions.
#. Questions about Fixing What is Broken Yes No
24. We have a formal listing of our added human factors interventions
since 1999.
25. We assess and report the impact of human factors interventions.
26. We could show these assessment reports tomorrow.
27. We have specific methods to reinforce maintenance human factors
to our middle managers in the maintenance organization.
#. Questions about taking Proactive Steps Yes No
28. Our human factors courses change with each offering, to address
new issues identified by workers and supervisors.
29. I can list specific examples of #1 above.
30. We have formal means for workers to provide suggestions to the
human factors specialist?
31. We have formal method for the human factors specialist to provide
regular briefings to senior maintenance management.
32. We work very closely with our regulator to monitor our human
factors program.
33. We employ a trained human factors specialist who spends over
75% of his/her time as an advocate for human factors in
maintenance.
34. We have a formal maintenance human factors campaign ongoing at
this time.
35. We are active participants in ATA or our International Human
Factors Working Group.

12
Fact or Fantasy?

36. We have a formal quality program like ISO9000 or High

Performance Workplace.
37. Our quality program explicitly addresses human factors.

13
Fact or Fantasy?

38. In the past year, we changed a process or a procedure because of

a human factors issue.
39. In the past year we bought new tooling because of a human factors
issue.
40. We have an explicit line item in the budget for human factors
interventions.
#. Questions about Measuring the Outputs Yes No
41. We perform a Cost-Benefit or Return-on-Investment calculation to
justify our human factors interventions.
42. We can show, at this moment, success stories and positive
examples of cost-benefit of our human factors interventions.
43. Our management demands ROI calculations in our proposed
program plans.
#. Questions on Planning for the Future Yes No
44. We have, or plan to have a maintenance human factors specialist
working 50% time during 2001.
45. We have, or plan to have one maintenance human factors specialist
working, during 2001, for each 2500 personnel in maintenance jobs
(Interpolate for smaller organizations).
46. We have a firm schedule to start/continue large-scale human
factors training in 2001.
47. We shall conduct a maintenance human factors audit during 2001.
48. We shall comply with JAR 66 and CAR 66 and related regulations.
49. We plan to conduct MEDA-like Investigator training in 2001.
50. We shall attend the FAA-Transport Canada-CAA Maintenance
Human Factors meeting in San Francisco in April 2002.

14